Go Back   UG Community @ Ultimate-Guitar.Com > Music > Recordings
User Name  
Password
Search:

Reply
Old 01-22-2013, 06:59 PM   #21
HeavyKaribean
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Lol artemis, i comment and you just say no as answer. You are the one trolling certainly xD
HeavyKaribean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 06:59 PM   #22
ChemicalFire
King of Bacon Pancakes
 
ChemicalFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The United Kingdom
Apart from that dip in the low mids and the hype in the top end...
__________________
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote:
Originally Posted by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
ChemicalFire is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 07:03 PM   #23
Artemis Entreri
Panned
 
Artemis Entreri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyKaribean
Lol artemis, i comment and you just say no as answer. You are the one trolling certainly xD


Because your answer was ridiculously ignorant. You CAN record anything with anything but that does not, by ANY means make it a good option. Especially with the "from what I've read." Reading and experience are two very different things.

Chemical and I argue a lot, but I'm fully with him on this thread except for my preference of the NT1.
__________________
Winner of the 2011 Virginia Guitar Festival

Protools HD
Lynx Aurora 16/HD192
Mojave, Sennheiser, AKG, EV etc mics
Focusrite ISA828 pres
Waves Mercury
Random Rack Gear

65 Deluxe Reverb
PRS CE 22
American Standard Strat
Taylor 712
Artemis Entreri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 07:05 PM   #24
HeavyKaribean
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
and you hear that? ahah xD have you tested that? really seeing and hearing what that dip and hype mean?
you don't even know what it means. so shut the **** up. Saying a mic is better than other based on how it responds at 50 Hz and 15 kHz. FOR VOICE? ****ing idiot xD
HeavyKaribean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 07:08 PM   #25
oneblackened
Future Breed Machine
 
oneblackened's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Asgaard
Dude... It's just a fact of life that condensers are more sensitive than dynamics...

Let it not be said that dynamics aren't useful. SM7Bs are very useful for vocals.
__________________
-Dave
LTD MH-400 (SD Distortion/59)
LTD EC-1000 (BKP Black Hawks)
LTD AW-7 (Dimarzio D-Activator 7s, Hipshot Bridge)
oneblackened is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 07:09 PM   #26
HeavyKaribean
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Artemis you are just a noob. Yeah experience is needed. And you dont seem to have it.
There is no aspect in wich NT1 would be a better option than Shure, Behringer, etc... they would all do a ****ing good job and a good quality recording if not used by noobs like you.
HeavyKaribean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 07:12 PM   #27
ChemicalFire
King of Bacon Pancakes
 
ChemicalFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The United Kingdom
Please enlighten us oh master. Show us your genius masterwork.
__________________
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote:
Originally Posted by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
ChemicalFire is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 07:13 PM   #28
Artemis Entreri
Panned
 
Artemis Entreri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyKaribean
Artemis you are just a noob. Yeah experience is needed. And you dont seem to have it.
There is no aspect in wich NT1 would be a better option than Shure, Behringer, etc... they would all do a ****ing good job and a good quality recording if not used by noobs like you.


You....you simply baffle me
__________________
Winner of the 2011 Virginia Guitar Festival

Protools HD
Lynx Aurora 16/HD192
Mojave, Sennheiser, AKG, EV etc mics
Focusrite ISA828 pres
Waves Mercury
Random Rack Gear

65 Deluxe Reverb
PRS CE 22
American Standard Strat
Taylor 712
Artemis Entreri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 07:15 PM   #29
ChemicalFire
King of Bacon Pancakes
 
ChemicalFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The United Kingdom
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyKaribean
and you hear that? ahah xD have you tested that? really seeing and hearing what that dip and hype mean?
you don't even know what it means. so shut the **** up. Saying a mic is better than other based on how it responds at 50 Hz and 15 kHz. FOR VOICE? ****ing idiot xD


The Eq response curve has nothing to do with how they response at 50hz and 15 khz, it's do with how they respond at every eq point between... the eq curve shows that the low mids have a slight dip and the highs are loud as ****.

I know what words mean and your a condescending idiot with nothing to back up your big talk.
__________________
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote:
Originally Posted by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
ChemicalFire is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 07:17 PM   #30
oneblackened
Future Breed Machine
 
oneblackened's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Asgaard
Calling Derek! CALLING DEREK!
__________________
-Dave
LTD MH-400 (SD Distortion/59)
LTD EC-1000 (BKP Black Hawks)
LTD AW-7 (Dimarzio D-Activator 7s, Hipshot Bridge)
oneblackened is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 07:19 PM   #31
HeavyKaribean
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
The Eq response curve has nothing to do with how they response at 50hz and 15 khz? Lol nothing more to say.. no sense arguing with idiots
HeavyKaribean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 07:20 PM   #32
ChemicalFire
King of Bacon Pancakes
 
ChemicalFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The United Kingdom
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyKaribean
The Eq response curve has nothing to do with how they response at 50hz and 15 khz? Lol nothing more to say.. no sense arguing with idiots


As you've said yourself, you can't HEAR those frequencies, so why do they matter?

Now you're just contradicting yourself.


And you're not arguing. You're going "LALALALA I'M RIGHT YOU'RE WRONG LALALALA I'M NOT LISTENING" whilst insulting people. That does not an argument make.
__________________
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote:
Originally Posted by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!

Last edited by ChemicalFire : 01-22-2013 at 07:28 PM.
ChemicalFire is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 09:06 PM   #33
jof1029
GO HOKIES!
 
jof1029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Atl, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyKaribean
It's even possible to make a cardioid sound like omni just by changing position.

Maybe you can make a generic cardioid sound like a generic omni in some cases by changing position. but you cannot make it behave the same way. each polar pattern has its uses, and saying otherwise is simply wrong.

now, if you can make something like an Shure sm57 sound like a Neumann U87 (or other high end condensor), i applaud you. it is something that no other person has managed. like polar patterns, for the rest of us mere mortals, different types of microphones, and even different mics of the same type, all have their uses.

because yes, i would still rather use a small diaphram condensor on an acoustic than a sm57.
__________________
I hope you meet someone your height
So you can see eye-to-eye
With someone as small as you

I have donated 3920 grains of rice!
jof1029 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 09:29 PM   #34
kyle62
Need a dispenser here!
 
kyle62's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: NW England


Either it's a troll...or someone just got an SM57 for Christmas and is butthurt that it's not the world-beating Über-mic they expected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyKaribean
Cause nowadays microphones have reached a very high level of quality.
If that's your argument, why are you recommending a mic that dates back to the 1950s?


Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyKaribean
Besides that you can make every mic sound like every other mic just by working with positioning. This is true, go search and practice a little.

Of course.

Nothing brings out the richness and depth of a Bosendorfer 290 like the Shure Green Bullet. And my personal favourite way to capture a screaming Marshall stack is a lavalier mic clipped to the grille cloth.
__________________
"I don't care about the things I leave at home, cause things can't really keep you company when you're alone"
Mark Sandman


Head honcho at Stubborn Sound!
https://soundcloud.com/stubbornsound
kyle62 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 09:49 PM   #35
HeavyKaribean
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Saying that an idiot is an idiot is pure realism and should not be taken as an insult. And I'll have my degree in Audio Engineering back up my big talk. But I'll explain:

http://www.rodemic.com/mics/nt1-a here are the specifications of rode NT1a

http://media.rodemic.com//images/mi.../nt1-a_freq.jpg this is the frequency response of the same. And what is the frequency response?

The FR (Frequency Response from now on FR, do not interpretate as being Frequency of Resonance) is the way the mic responds trough out the audible band of frequencies. In a non redundant speech is the boost or decrement of the output signal and will vary based on the pressure, frequency or angle of incidence of the acoustic wave in the mic membrane. Normally, frequency response graphics are made to a standard pressure and angle of incidence. As may notice, the X scale of the graphic is set from 10-10 dB's. The objective of a perfect microphone response is to be flat at all frequencies. However perfection is impossible because microphones are based on physical principles and minor variations may occur. Let's say that 1dB or 2dB of pontual variation isn't bad. Has you can see the X scale is made so that you think that the response is mainly good. But that's wrong. If the scale was from 5-5 dB's you would see that at 3000 Hz, 5000 Hz and 10000 Hz the output signal will have a significant boost wich is bad for any recording specially in the middle frequencies that have major weight in almost every type os music. Is this a major problem? Well it's not good but it's easily solved. How? Positioning and equalization. This graphic is made upon measures taken on axis at the distance of one meter. You change that and you change everything.

Now someone understood wrong when I said that microphones won't make a major diference in the way the recording sounds. I'm not saying that there aren't specific microphones for specific situations, I'm saying that if you thinks that's your biggest problem well you are wrong. As I said before. Positioning of the microphone will solve many of your problems. The thing is that such requires a level of experience of a life time. I don't have it, you probably don't have it too, and nobody here probably knows about it 'cause they all made a big scandal when I said SM57 and SM58. But I'm telling the truth. I had a teacher, 60 years old. He would go the AES conventions and make a a 50 € behringer sound like a 5000 € Neumann. It's a life time of work.

Now believe me when I say that from the microphones you have on your list won't make a difference if you choose number one, two or three. They are basically the same. I like condenser microphones, they are usually more flat than dynamic microphones and all but not the ones you have there. You will see that worst problem you have are your monitors and the room in wich you are recording. 'Cause that is what really will change your sound.

The problem with condenser microphones is that high SPL (sound pressure levels) can easily damage them. Percussion might be a problem. Singing very loud can also be a problem. You will have less versatility.

Don't listen to haters. They just don't know of what they talk. I have made a lot of nice recordings of classical guitars, acoustic guitars, snares, even voice with an SM57. And yes I have other microphones. I have Rodes, AKG and i worked with many more. You can do a good job with all of them. If you are starting I think a versatile microphone would be more useful to you.

To all the haters:

jof1029: You should then applaud me. And if you prefer small diaphragm condensor microphones that's your taste but I assure you, you wouldn't do a better job than me with an SM57 recording an Acoustic Guitar.

Chemical Fire: Is this argument enough?

Oneblackened: I liked your comment. They are more sensitive indeed. Nothing to say there.

Artemis: No.
HeavyKaribean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 10:02 PM   #36
jof1029
GO HOKIES!
 
jof1029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Atl, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyKaribean
And if you prefer small diaphragm condensor microphones that's your taste but I assure you, you wouldn't do a better job than me with an SM57 recording an Acoustic Guitar.

thats not the point. i know i would do better with a half decenent SDC than an SM57 on an acoustic. because ive done both. im not comparing me with one mic to you with another, thats a silly comparison. if youve got the same person with the choice between two mics, which would they choose? thats the point.

when you say someone can make a cheap mic sound great, i ask what they could do with a great mic meant for that application.

as for the sm57, it is a great utility mic, i wont argue that. it just would not be my first choice for someone who was primarily recording vocals and acoustics.
__________________
I hope you meet someone your height
So you can see eye-to-eye
With someone as small as you

I have donated 3920 grains of rice!
jof1029 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 10:10 PM   #37
HeavyKaribean
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by jof1029
thats not the point. i know i would do better with a half decenent SDC than an SM57 on an acoustic.


That is wrong. I would believe if you say that you will find the sound you want faster with a SDC than with the SM57 but if you know what you are doing you can make the two sound good.

Now if you say that you prefer the sound of SDC ok fine. It's taste. But it isn't better or worst.
HeavyKaribean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 10:17 PM   #38
HeavyKaribean
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
And i forgot. I didn't say they could make a cheap mic sound great. I said they can make a cheap mic sound THE SAME as a great one. The good one would not do a better job. The experiment was basically this:

A classical guitar. Someone (with knowledge in the matter) would go and place the Neumann.
Record was made. He would listen and than he would place the Behringer in a place were it would sound the same.
Just that.

And when i say classical guitar is just an example. This was done many times even recording monitors playing music.

It's possible. You just have to be boss xD
HeavyKaribean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 11:04 PM   #39
Artemis Entreri
Panned
 
Artemis Entreri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyKaribean
And i forgot. I didn't say they could make a cheap mic sound great. I said they can make a cheap mic sound THE SAME as a great one. The good one would not do a better job. The experiment was basically this:

A classical guitar. Someone (with knowledge in the matter) would go and place the Neumann.
Record was made. He would listen and than he would place the Behringer in a place were it would sound the same.
Just that.

And when i say classical guitar is just an example. This was done many times even recording monitors playing music.

It's possible. You just have to be boss xD



That's simply not true. I hope you realize what you're saying is absurd. I do not deny that the skill of the engineer is by far the most important part of a signal chain but the day a Nuemann and a Behringer sound the same I'll eat a brick.


And please, please post a recording of you tracking an acoustic guitar with an SM57. Hell, I'll let you use a pair. Because I really want to like SM57s on acoustic guitars but even with a $1000 preamp, it lacks the clarity and definition of a decent SDC. That's not only preference, it's a better. Of course you can record an acoustic guitar with an SM57, no one will say you can't. You can even make it sound good; Some of Zeppelin's acoustic stuff was done with one. But why do it when you could use a condenser which is more appropriate for the task?
__________________
Winner of the 2011 Virginia Guitar Festival

Protools HD
Lynx Aurora 16/HD192
Mojave, Sennheiser, AKG, EV etc mics
Focusrite ISA828 pres
Waves Mercury
Random Rack Gear

65 Deluxe Reverb
PRS CE 22
American Standard Strat
Taylor 712

Last edited by Artemis Entreri : 01-22-2013 at 11:06 PM.
Artemis Entreri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 11:12 PM   #40
HeavyKaribean
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Quote:
but the day a Nuemann and a Behringer sound the same I'll eat a brick


Your lost lol
HeavyKaribean is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:59 PM.

Forum Archives / About / Terms of Use / Advertise / Contact / Ultimate-Guitar.Com © 2014
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.